Following the conclusion of the recent sabbatical officer elections, it became clear that, in one case, important rules around election expenses had not been met. As a result, the candidate originally announced as the winner of the Vice President role was later deemed ineligible to take up the position. The Students’ Union has since taken time to reflect on this outcome and review how our processes might be improved to prevent similar issues in the future.
After a full investigation, a decision was made by the independent Returning Officer from NUS, and this decision was upheld on appeal. The candidate was therefore formally withdrawn from the election, and the votes were recounted in their absence. This led to a new candidate being elected, whose win was confirmed and announced at a meeting of Union Council in line with our procedures.
We recognise that this situation caused considerable distress to the withdrawn candidate, particularly due to the initial announcement of their success and the subsequent reversal. While the decision to remove their candidacy was valid and based on clear criteria, the sequence of events highlighted areas where our procedures could and should be stronger.
Although this is the first time such a situation has occurred at Bucks Students’ Union, and our team acted with the intention of supporting all candidates fairly, we acknowledge that a different approach may have helped prevent some elements of the upset. In particular, allowing extra time for the expense submission, whilst well intentioned and based on assurances, proved to be a misjudgement in this instance.
Looking ahead, one of the key improvements we will enforce is a strict rule with string guidance, requiring all expense documentation to be fully reviewed and approved before any count begins. This and other procedural changes are being developed to ensure greater robustness in future elections.
We want to be clear that no judgements were made about the withdrawn candidate’s intentions with regards the rule breach. We appreciate the commitment and effort they brought to the campaign and acknowledge the distress caused by the later developments, for which we are deeply sympathetic.
To that individual, we offer our sincere apology. The public nature of the announcement and subsequent reversal caused personal strain and distress, and for that, we are truly sorry. This could have been avoided and would have gone some way to lessening the blow. We are committed to learning from this experience and putting measures in place to protect the integrity of our elections and the wellbeing of all participants moving forward.